Eclipse HomeCare (Terryspring Court)

At the time of the inspection, all the people receiving care lived in one specialist housing location. Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also consider any wider social care provided. This included how care staff supported people to access the social activities provided by people's specialist housing landlord.

There were sufficient staff to care for people and people could rely on staff providing the care agreed at the times people wanted. The provider had systems in place to review and take learning from any incidents.

People were supported to have their medicines by staff who had been trained to do this. The provider planned to review the checks they made to ensure the risk of people receiving medicinal creams which may not be effective was further reduced. People told us staff followed good practice to promote the reduction of infections.

People and relatives' views were considered when people's care needs were assessed. Staff were supported to provide good care to people through training and induction programmes. The training staff undertook reflected the needs of the people they cared for, and was complimented by, advice from other health and social care professionals, to meet people's specific needs.

Where people needed assistance to see health and social care professionals staff supported them to do this, so they would enjoy the best health outcomes possible. People told us staff regularly offered to make them drinks and supported them to have enough to eat, based on their preferences.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People had developed very positive relationships with the considerate and kind staff who cared for them. The bonds between people and staff meant people were confident to ask for additional help when they

wanted it. Staff spoke warmly about the people they supported and knew people well.

People made their own decisions about their care and were listened to. Staff considered people's rights to dignity, independence and privacy in the way they cared for them.

People decided what care they wanted, and relatives were encouraged to contribute to care plans and reviews, as their family members wished. Staff worked with people to adapt their planned care, as people's needs changed. This helped to ensure people's needs continued to be met.

People's communication needs were assessed, and staff responded to these needs, to promote people's inclusion and independence. Staff sensitively managed any concerns or complaints and learning was taken from these. People's preferences at the end of their lives were acted on.

The provider was further developing their care plan processes by introducing electronic care planning and recording. Staff would be further supported to provide good care to people through the inclusion of additional information on how to support people to manage their risks, information on people's previous history and how people would wish to be supported in the event of their sudden death.

People and their relatives were very positive about the service they received and were asked for their views on the care provided. Staff understood how they were expected to care for people and were motivated to provide good care, through incentives and recognition of good practice.

The provider and senior staff checked the quality and safety of the care provided and reflected on people's care experiences. The development of the service was informed by work undertaken with other specialist organisations to drive through further improvements in people's care.